(60 votes, average: 4.62 out of 5)
Loading ...
Dear Mr. President,
Let me preface this letter by saying that I am writing to you as a supporter—a concerned supporter, yes, but a supporter nonetheless. So let what follows be constructive criticism. I’m not Fox (faux) News or Rush Limbaugh; I’m not Ann Coulter or Sean Hannity; I don’t think you’re a racist like Glenn Beck and I can’t see Russia from my house like Sarah Palin can. But I am concerned. It’s not so much about the economy. You’ve stopped most of the bleeding, saved the banking industry (which in turn prevented an entire financial collapse), and injected stimulus (which should have been bigger) into the economy. So, economically, you’ve done okay.
However, there are three issues that make me question whether you’re as strong as I perceived, or merely a man of empty words and promises like so many of your critics claimed throughout the campaign. First off is the issue of health care. I understand that you’ve had to deal with Democrats who lack ambition and Republicans who refuse to cooperate, but with a filibuster majority in the Senate, the progress on health care, or lack thereof, is unacceptable. Fourteen thousand Americans lose their health coverage every day while politicians argue like schoolchildren in the Capitol, calling each other names, screaming “You lie,” and making up completely fallacious claims about death panels and coverage for illegal immigrants. Now, granted, the Baucus Bill just passed the Senate Finance Committee. However, at what cost? It was a Pyrrhic victory for the Democrats at best. Face it Mr. President—it was a watered-down bill and it wasn’t what you wanted. It had no public option and no employer mandate. It lacked strong penalties for those who didn’t obtain available insurance, and it left 17 million people uninsured. Your effort is better than Clinton’s, but it’s still not enough. You said in your speech in early September to a joint session of Congress that this is “the season for action.” It’s almost winter and I’m still waiting for bold, decisive action.
The second issue is Afghanistan. Obviously, the situation we’re in right now is none of your doing. George Bush’s capricious decision to enter Iraq and deny resources to the war effort in Afghanistan is one of the biggest foreign affairs blunders of the past couple of decades. However, you ran for the job, and it is now your mess to clean up. You’ve had the right mindset. Appointing the more ambitious General Stanley McChrystal, retaining a tough secretary of defense in Robert Gates, and promising to deploy more troops have all been positive decisions. However, as with health care and the economy, you simply aren’t doing enough. I understand the war has become incredibly unpopular, and that raising troop levels is almost politically untenable, but you have to make your decisions based on the best interests of the country and not on political tenability. General McChrystal has called for 40,000 more troops and you’ve responded with a quiet deployment of 13,000.
Whether your reluctance to follow McChrystal’s recommendations is a result of your recent Nobel Prize, I cannot say. I can say, Mr. President, that if you want any chance of winning this war and being a two term president, half measures cannot be taken. With issues like Afghanistan, it’s all or nothing. And if you continue to vacillate over your decisions and fail to take decisive action, you’ll be sending several thousand more brave men and women to their deaths with nothing to show for it. You know your fellow Democrats are wrong. You know that leaving Afghanistan is much more pernicious to the country’s security than persevering. Ignore Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and do what needs to be done. Adapt to the new circumstances. Al-Qaeda is no longer operating in Afghanistan, terrorism has continued to destabilize nuclear-armed Pakistan, and with every day of inaction, every day without a new strategy for the Af-Pak war, the situation worsens. Don’t let it become your Vietnam, Mr. President. Don’t make that mistake. For the first time in my life, I agree with Dick Cheney. I think you’re afraid. And I didn’t support a candidate who governs out of fear.
The same goes for my final issue—gay rights and, specifically, the completely insensible “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. You promised that you would abolish the rule. And why not? It is a travesty and one of the most idiotic policies ever implemented. Since the policy was enacted in 1994, over 13,000 able and willing soldiers have been discharged from the army, including myriad vital Arab linguists, which are in extremely high demand, simply because of their sexual orientation. When you’re spread thin militarily and short on Arab linguists, how does it make any sense to discharge the people you truly need based on whether or not they are gay? These are Americans who are capable and willing to fight and die for their country, and you tell them no? I’m starting to see some truth in the criticism of you as weak during the campaign. Please, prove me wrong. Don’t be a president of empty rhetoric and undelivered promises. Don’t let this issue slip down on your priority list. In the words of Jon Stewart, “You’re the president of the United States. If you have too much on your plate, get a bigger plate!” You gave an impassioned speech to the Human Rights Council, reiterating your promise to the LGBT community in the country that you would fight for their rights. If you renege on that promise, if you break your word due to political tenability, if you are too much of a coward to enforce what is morally correct, then, Mr. President, you don’t deserve the office you hold any more than your predecessor. You’ve said time and again that the American people are going to have to make “hard decisions.” You need to be held to the same standard.
Sincerely,
Cody Pomeranz
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Cody,
the meat of your argument is very good and I agree (shockingly) with your primary argument of disappointment in the President’s lack of efficiency in executing his policy goals. Unfortunately, however, I think you lose a lot in your opening paragraph when you come right out and start satirically attacking “conservative” stereotypes. But more importantly, even though I disagree with the solutions to the problems that you have presented, I respect your critical view of the President that I so often see you cheer-leading.
P.S.
“Faux” News, as you call it, is the most dominant cable news network in the US with the highest ratings, largest earnings, and broadest, most politically diverse viewership (50% of its viewers consider themselves either Democrat or Independent) and unfortunately, I think much of your prospective readership will be disheartened upon reading your opening lines and you I think you lose credibility in the more serious, more important, and less radical and sarcastic aspect of your piece.
Brian
Brian,
I think you’re missing the point of Cody’s opening paragraph. The conservatives he referenced like Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh have always been opposed to virtually all of the Obama administration’s policies–I think the fact that Cody is writing “as a supporter,” makes his criticisms more powerful and more believable than something Fox News would report.
Brian,
I also support Cody’s opening paragraph. I believe his usage of literary devices and entertaining quips allow the reader to contend with such conservatives he listed. The irony of a supporter of the president criticizing him is very original and amusing. Great Job, Cody!
TALK ABOUT A BIAS!!!!!! the first paragraph turns any republican or independent off immediately. Anybody that makes fun of Sarah Palin for her “I can see Russia from my house” comment either hasn’t seen the video or has never heard of sarcasm. Obama hasn’t done absolutely nothing for bipartisan, which he stood up and promised to John McCain in the Republican party’s ball. You pretend as if it’s the Republicans on capitol hill which are coming up with the craziness about death panels. It is really radical republicans that aren’t civilized at all, not the educated republicans. The stimulus definitely did not need more; it needed to take out some of the silly programs like the 1.8 million dollars going to pig research. Stimulus money also paid for office chairs which have a retail value of $1,100!
I do, however, agree with you when you say that going into Iraq was a dumb idea. Afghanistan is terribly underfunded, and its putting the future of our nation in danger. You should not use Bush as the image of all Republicans. He was a soft president that was afraid to veto any bill that came to him. He was not the least bit conservative, but somehow he was elected twice. Obama received the Nobel Prize for being popular. He recieved the prize for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,” but Obama is really weak in the area of foreign policy, and that is why he chose Joe Biden as his running mate.
You seemed to have a firm grasp on the topics you were arguing, but you didn’t look at it from both sides of the fence. I liked you vocabulary in this article too. The thing that grabbed my attention and set this article apart from any other Scroll article is that you showed that you do not belong to a political party, and you do not accept that everything your party does is good. You stood up for your beliefs well, and I admire that.
Tina Fey remarked that she can see Russia from her house in an impersonation of Sarah Palin.
Sarah Palin did not.
Hannah, first off, you might not have caught the humor intended in the first paragraph. However, Sarah Palin did indeed, several times actually, cite Alaska’s proximity to Russia as a reason for her strong experience in foreign policy.
Dear Cody,
All I can ask for from you is patience. I realize that this post is dated, but, save the President’s address re: Afghanistan Tuesday night, not a lot has changed. The problem with fast-tracking health care reform is that something is revolutionary needs to be done right. Ideas need to be made and changed and shot down and talked about; yes, it’s frustrating, and it makes it harder and leaves more time open for people of both parties to criticize but that’s what we need. It happened with Medicare and it will happen with Health Care reform if we want something to pass the Senate.
And speaking of the Senate, it’s a rather useful bunch of people. You can blame your problems with American policy as much on the United States Senate and the House of Representatives (Schmidt, good god…) as you can on President Obama. Senator Brown has as much to say about health reform, tort reform, abortion coverage, public options, triggers and insurance over state lines as all the news anchors, and it’s his job to listen to Ohioans about how you want him to vote. Obama can push his health agenda all he wants, but it was up to Reid to bring it to the floor and it was up to the Senate to open debate. The public option is back from the dead but passing it is a precise science that takes time. Frustrating? Absolutely, but that’s an inherent part of bureaucracy.
I don’t think that the President is afraid. I think that he is trying, perhaps a little too hard, not to make the mistake of the President of Christmas Past, entering quickly into an unfounded war without thinking about the economic and military costs to all involved parties. NATO and UN approval and aid is key for this not to become another Vietnam, or another reason for foreign states to judge America as a pretentious hegemon.
These issues, and social issues, are on your representation. Call them and yell at them (well, not the reps, but the unpaid interns like me). And yeah, Obama has a lot on his plate to balance, but it all comes down to Congress. They can’t debate unemployment insurance extensions, health care, foreign policy, trials of prisoners in New York, migration and trade issues and social policy all at the same time. Congress has its reputation for working slowly, but it’s needed to get quality legislation. 2,000 pages takes a long time to write, read and edit.
The Scroll site looks amazing, by the way, and I like seeing the updates in my Google reader. Keep in touch about school-let me know when you’re in DC!
Best,
Brooke (CCDS ‘08)
Your disappointment, Cody, is a rare one. What you have not taken into account are the very PEOPLE of this country. Senators and Congressmen have the duty to fight for their constituents. The facts must be understood. 70% percent of Americans are satisfied with their health care already. California, one of the most pro-gay and leftist states in the nation, just saw its populace vote down gay marriage for the SECOND time in a decade (it wasn’t close). Congress will never vote for gay legislation or a healthcare overhaul when they have midterm elections coming this fall. They want to remain in office. Radical changes aren’t supposed to happen in D.C. Our founders designed government so that change would come with slow, incremental changes.
Unlike the leftist “progressives”, most Americans understand the issues of national debt, raising taxes, and lowering public morality. As for your remark that “So, economically, you’ve done okay,” you have proven yourself ignorant. Jobs continue to be lost, when this country needs to create 200,000 each month just to break even. Home prices are still dismal, with toxic mortgages still soaring. Corporations are still failing to get by. Only the market has rebounded, but even that is questionable. Because of terrifying debt and overvalued companies, many experts now predict the market will tumble these coming months. Yet, Obama has done “okay”?
Obama, the most radically left president in our history, has proven naïve, inexperienced, and out of touch. The house is expected to lose 30-50 seats because voters don’t want these drastic changes. If that number is closer to 50, Nancy Pelosi will be out as speaker. Harry Reid has a 32% approval rating in Nevada, and will be gone completely come November. Voters are showing that they don’t want what Cody would like.
Cody, governmental expansion is not healthy. Obama’s failures are merely showing that most people understand that.
Let me preface by saying that I’m not exactly sure who I am replying to. I’m assuming this is not Pat Dunn. First off, calling me ignorant for saying that Obama has done a decent job handling the economy shows some lack of knowledge about economics. We are experiencing a human recession. But we are experiencing a statistical recovery, which is a precursor to a human recovery. Yes, jobs are being lost. But you are not taking into account the rate at which they are being lost. For instance, last February, America lost 726,000 jobs. Keep in mind that this was Obama’s first month in office, before he had enacted any of his economic legislation. Yes, that’s correct, this recession occurred under the Bush admin. But back to the point. 726,000 jobs lost last February. This February, 36,000 jobs were lost, and 193,000 jobs were created. Immediately after the Stimulus Bill, the legislation that conservatives called a “giant waste,” the rate of jobs being lost per month decreased significantly. And each month, the decrease has continued. As you can see, jobs are still being lost, thus the unemployment rate is still rising, but the pace of its increase slows. All the major economics organizations, like the Congressional Budget Office and IHS Global Insight, now predict that the stimulus bill will have created over 2 million jobs. It already directly funded 600,000 last quarter. That’s only directly. Stimulus success is reliant on a “multiplier” effect that is virtually impossible to measure. A factory worker keeps his job b/c his factory received government stimulus. Now still has a little money to spend at that diner next to his house. And now that waitress who he’s tipping has a little more money to buy clothes for her newborn baby. Something like that. Over the past year, Obama and his economic council have overseen an infusion of liquidity into the market through a purchase of over a trillion dollars in mortgage-backed securities by the Federal Reserve Bank. The Fed has lowered interest rates to zero to induce credit growth, made currency swaps with foreign banks to further liquidity, and attempted to spur lending by buying toxic assets. Also, the economy saw the GDP rise over 5% last quarter, the fastest GDP growth in history.
As for healthcare, we are more similar in that area. Note that this article is dated, so much has changed. I was hoping Obama would make additions and changes to the newest bill that he has not. However, as for the 70% fact, tell that to Nikki White, the beautiful, middle-class, well-educated girl who lost her life because no insurance agency would cover her because she had lupus. She was too rich for medicaid, but too poor for insurance. She died from a preventable disease b/c she couldn’t afford insurance, and 20,000 people just like her suffer the same fate annually. Nikki White was only 32. You can read more about her story in my article about healthcare. Healthcare is a right, not a privilege.
Lastly, I was speaking about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, not gay marriage. Nevertheless, both are absurd. Enlistment in the military should predicated solely on one’s capability and willingness to serve his country, not on one’s sexual orientation. As for gay marriage, this is a lengthy argument I would rather have in person. The absurdity of it is beyond me. What I will say is that it took a Supreme Court decision (Loving v. Virginia) to allow interracial marriage. The American people don’t always know what’s best. Yes, the founders structured government so that change would come slow. These founders also tried to make a government that would protect the minority against the majority. With all due respect, who do you think you are telling someone else they can’t marry the person they love, when of course, you have had that luxury? As for your quote, “Obama, the most radically left president in our history,” this is an utterly false and ridiculous claim. Obama is liberal, but he has actually acted quite centrist. He has had amazing success in Pakistan and Afghanistan, more so than any other President, and he has stabilized the economy. Not bad for a first year. I’m not sure who you are, but I respect your opinions. I just don’t agree with some of them. I don’t think it’s productive to call me ignorant, but rather a person of different views.
Cody- you are correct, it is not Pat Dunn, just someone else with the first name Pat. Only the first name was supplied.